House District 38: Who is the real Mary Hotvedt?

img_2118

This year the Democratic nominee for House District 38 is a life-long political activist, the highly-educated Dr. Mary Hotvedt.  Today, Hotvedt is a community activist who leads community festivals such as the Festival of the Written Word, but let’s scratch beyond the surface to see who she really is.

“Cultural Marxist”

Democratic nominee for House District 38 once declared herself a “Cultural Marxist” during her tenure as a professor at what is now the Indiana University according to a research paper, “She sees herself as a cultural Marxist and a feminist…Her six-year marriage ended in divorce during that time. Now she lives communally with adults and children…She does not see marriage as a likely future alternative; she prefers to live communally and to maintain some other sexually open relationships in addition to a primary one.”

Controversial Kinsey Institute

Documentation also shows that Mary Hotvedt “worked at Kinsey Institute” as she earned her Ph.d. and that she, “acknowledge[d] that her academic work is influenced by political views.”  Today her bio for the Festival of the Written Word website, where she is on the board, highlights her education at Kinsey.

Kinsey Institute, which is part of Indiana University, is named after Alfred Kinsey the Father of the Sexual Revolution and has long been associated with questionable activities and iffy research.  Kinsey used one pedophile to gather much of his research on sexuality in children and his research ascertained a number of “facts” based on the sexual abuse of infants and children as young as five months old!

hotvedt

The infamous Table 34 from Sexual Behavior in the Human Male compiled by Kinsey tested orgasms in children as young as five months old.  5 month baby tested for “orgasm” allegedly has “3” and the 4 year old has “26” in “24 hrs.”

table-34

According to an article in the Seattle Times, “[T]he director of the Kinsey Institute revealed that Kinsey’s conclusions on the sexuality of young children were based not on scientific study but on the secret history of a single pedophile who kept a diary of his experiences with 317 pre-adolescent boys.”

“[T]he material in the tables came from one man,” said John Bancroft the director of the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction at Indiana University in Bloomington, “An extraordinary man with incredible numbers of sexual experiences on which he kept very careful notes.”

Nowhere does the Kinsey report reveal that its conclusions on the sexual capacity of a sample of 317 young boys are based solely on evidence provided by one man, and nowhere does the report reveal that the man was a pedophile – or, as Bancroft calls him, “an omniphile, an extraordinarily active man.”

in 1990 Mary Hotvedt wrote a paper Emerging and Submerging Adolescent Sexuality: Culture and Sexual Orientation.  The paper was published by Oxford University, copyrighted by Kinsey Institute and edited by John Bancroft (former head of Kinsey Institute).  The paper talked about children and sex education, “Sex education, then, in each culture is aimed at not merely teaching biological facts of reproduction to maturing individuals.  Ethographies and anecdotes from our own lives are sufficient to remind us that pre-pubescent children have a reasonably good grasp of the basics.”

What exactly Mary Hotvedt did at the Kinsey Institute is unclear– does she condone the cruelty and sexual abuse against children by a pedophile?  This “testing” used for “research”?  What does she have to say about this?!

Does Mary Hotvedt approve of this abuse?  Kinsey famously said, “The only unnatural sexual act is that which you cannot perform.”  Does Cultural Marxist Mary Hotvedt agree?

What work did Mary Hotvedt do for the Kinsey Institute?…

Can we trust Hotvedt to be honest with us?!

Will Cultural Marxist Hotvedt do one thing and say another…as long as she can get away with it?

In March local Democrat candidates attended Farm & Livestock Bureau meetings in Grant County. “Thoroughly enjoyed meeting with Grant County Farm & Livestock Bureau folks last night in Silver City and the night before in Gila,” said Democratic nominee for House District 32 Candie Sweetser, “Major issues affecting their members (and all agriculturists) are burdensome regulations and government overreach.”

In contrast Cultural Marxist Mary Hotvedt mocked the meeting and Farm Bureau behind Farm Bureau Members’ backs saying,  “A more serious question: We were all with the Farm and Livestock Bureau a couple weeks ago for two scintillating evenings…” as raucous laughter ensued from fellow progressives in the room.  “Scintillating” means “brilliantly lively, stimulating, or witty” according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary.

What was Cultural Marxist Mary Hotvedt’s excuse for her comments?  “Nobody was at the Farm Bureau Meeting,” but obviously fellow-Democrat Candie Sweetser disagreed.

Who is the real Cultural Marxist Mary Hotvedt?!  Can we count on her to be open and honest or will she say one thing openly and turn around and lie behind our backs?!

Categories:

One Comment

  1. Candie Sweetser gets it. Agriculture is the backbone of Luna and Grant counties and a majority of counties in New Mexico. Progressives act like the food comes from the store and that’s all they need. Hope the true residents of District 38 stand up and vote and leave this woman at home.

    Like

Your comments and criticism are welcomed and encouraged. Please keep it "G-rated."

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s